Jobs report is not good: it may be as low as 140,000 although

[Avorysuds]

Obama Blows Republicans Out Of The Water With Fastest Job Growth Pace Since Clinton

President Obama, the alleged “socialist” president, has presided over the longest uninterrupted stretch of private sector job growth on record. Private sector.

The Rich are more wealthy than ever, and profits are soaring... And you are braging about job growth under Obama.

But you also post pictures saying the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer... And how the rich don't create jobs.

So what is it?

That's the problem with dumb ass pics and even dumber captions, dumb people make them up and even dumber people post them.

 

[bedowin62]

Calculating and reporting on Functional Unemployment would provide policy-makers and the American public a better perspective on labor force participation, employment-population statistics, tax revenue generation, and entitlement/welfare program expenditures. Understanding of the impact of the functionally unemployed would have equipped U.S. policy-makers with much better insights regarding economic recovery efforts during and after the Great Recession of 2008/09.
During and after the Great Recession, policy-makers focused almost entirely on U3 metrics rates and numbers of officially unemployed. The Great Recession cost the United States 8.7 million jobs that have been slowly recovered over the last five years with a net gain of several million jobs (see Jobenomics U.S. Employment Analysis: Q2 2015). While this is good news, these statistics do not tell the complete story. The overall U.S. labor force has not improved, but is weaker by 3.8 million due to the functional unemployment factor.
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

 

[bedowin62]

As shown above, shortly after the Great Recession, the U3 rate reached its peak at 10% in October 2009. Since then, the U3 rate has dropped to 5.3%, which represents 7.1 million less unemployed Americans—seemingly good news. During the same period, 10.9 million citizens voluntarily departed the work force—many to the netherworld of perpetual unemployment and welfare. Consequently, while America decreased its number of unemployed by 7.1 million, it increased the number of its non-working, able-bodied, adults by 10.9 million, for a net loss of 3.8 million employed workers—not good news. From an overall labor force perspective, the U3 rate is a relatively poor indicator and undeserving of the amount of attention it receives.
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

 

[rightwinger]

Obama Blows Republicans Out Of The Water With Fastest Job Growth Pace Since Clinton

President Obama, the alleged “socialist” president, has presided over the longest uninterrupted stretch of private sector job growth on record. Private sector.

The Rich are more wealthy than ever, and profits are soaring... And you are braging about job growth under Obama.

But you also post pictures saying the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer... And how the rich don't create jobs.

So what is it?

That's the problem with dumb ass pics and even dumber captions, dumb people make them up and even dumber people post them.

You are correct....most of this economic growth is going to the rich

Time to undo those supply side economic theories, don't you think?

 

[pinqy]

The Civilian Labor Force is defined as citizens,

Wrong. It is all people in the United States.

who are either employed or unemployed looking for a job, are at least 16 years old, are not serving in the U.S. armed forces and are not institutionalized.

Correct.

The U.S. government and private sector currently employs 141.8 million people.
The four major subcategories are: (1) 22 million federal, state and local government employees and an estimated 10 million contractors who work for the government, (2) 68 million full-time private sector employees, (3) 27 million part-time private sector employees, and (4) 15 million self-employed workers.[/qutoe] Close enough

There are 16.5 million unemployed and underemployed people who are looking for work. -

Wrong. In that number they are including the marginally attached...who are NOT looking for work (which is why they're not classified as unemployed) and those working Part Time for Economic Reasons (willing and able to work full time but working part time due to slow business or couldn't find a full time job) who do not have to be looking for a new job.

 

[bedowin62]

Comparing the size of the Not-in-Labor-Force to the private sector labor force increases the disparity even further (36% versus 9%, or 25.0 million versus 9.7 million). This comparison is important since the private sector workforce provides the bulk of U.S. employment, tax revenue and social subsidies (healthcare, training, etc.). If current trends continue, the Not-in-Labor-Force will exceed the private sector labor force by 2023.
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

 

[bedowin62]

According to BLS data[8], those in the Not-in-Labor-Force category - See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

 

[BluesLegend]

This is what happens when the free press is corrupted by lying lowlife scum liberals. For years this administration has talked out of both sides of its mouth declaring both how great the economy is under Obama while simultaneously claiming the poor and middle class are in dire straights. The press? They have looked the other way and let them lie.

We already know what economic policies work best for our country. Clinton knew that we had to cut spending and increase revenues. We had revenues of 20% of GDP and 4 surpluses (3 after BJ Bill vetoed the GOP's $700+ billion tax cuts) Then something terrible happened, the Republicans gained complete control in 2001 and instead of sticking with what was working they decided that their ideology was more important. The debt has gone up $12+ trillion since then.

DUBYA LOST OVER 1+ MILLION JOBS WITH HIS AND THE GOP'S "JOB CREATOR" POLICIES, OBAMA HAS SEEN NEARLY 13 MILLION JOBS CREATED SINCE HITTING BUSH'S BOTTOM MARCH 2010

I was tired of your lies like 100 posts ago. We keep correcting your lies yet you go right on bloviating the lies anyway. I'm not surprised it seems lies is all the left has left.

 

[pinqy]

The Not Looking For Work group includes those Not-in-Labor-Force and All Others in the U.S. population.

Ummmm no. The population is only Labor Force and Not in the Labor Force. There is no "other."

Not-in-Labor-Force includes people (over 16 years old) such as discouraged workers, citizens who choose not to work, welfare recipients, students, retired, stay-at-home caregivers, etc. There are 93.6 million Not-in-Labor-Force.

Again, it's not limited to citizens.
[qutoe]Remaining citizens who are not included in the previous three categories are classified as All Others by Jobenomics (the BLS does not survey and report on these citizens). Jobenomics calculates that this All Others category includes 69.3 million citizens that cannot work (e.g., children, elderly, disabled), are institutionalized or serving in the U.S. armed forces.[/QUOTE]
BLS does not exclude the elderly or disabled. Not sure why Jobenomics is including the military as not working.

 

[Avorysuds]

Obama Blows Republicans Out Of The Water With Fastest Job Growth Pace Since Clinton

President Obama, the alleged “socialist” president, has presided over the longest uninterrupted stretch of private sector job growth on record. Private sector.

The Rich are more wealthy than ever, and profits are soaring... And you are braging about job growth under Obama.

But you also post pictures saying the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer... And how the rich don't create jobs.

So what is it?

That's the problem with dumb ass pics and even dumber captions, dumb people make them up and even dumber people post them.

You are correct....most of this economic growth is going to the rich

Time to undo those supply side economic theories, don't you think?

Sure I agree, no more bail outs (done by Obama), no more massive stimulus for the rich (Done by Obama), and stop the .02% interest rates for the bankers to lend to the peeon masses at 4%-20%, also done by Obama.

You have to stop the massive corruption being done under Obama's watch, with his approval and his support.

 

[pinqy]

The BLS reports that 94% of Not-in-Labor-Force currently wants a job or desires to be in the U.S. workforce anytime soon.

That's not true...in fact the opposite...94% say they do NOT want a job.

 

[bedowin62]

The labor force participation rate is the percentage of working-age persons who are employed or unemployed but looking for a job in the Civilian Labor Force. The U.S. labor force participation rate suffered a serious decline from a high of 67.3% in January 2000 to 62.6% today—a net 7.0% decline from peak and a low that has not occurred since October 1977. Today’s labor force participation rate would be much lower if not for working women who did not participate in the U.S. labor force in 1977 as they do today. The primary reason for the dramatic drop in the labor force participation rate is largely due to those that simply have quit looking for work and are now categorized as Not-in-Labor-Force
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

take a REAL GOOD LOOK AT THIS CHART.

 

[BluesLegend]

The economy is improving, and, yes, the poor and the working classes have been denied their fair portion of it. What is new?

^^^ there it is again the left lying. Somehow the economy is both awesome under Obama yet the awesome Obama economy somehow sucks for the poor and middle class you people are hilarious.

 

[Dad2three]

Job creation misses big in September

The unemployment rate has been declining steadily, but that has come in significant part due to the lowest labor force participation rate since the late 1970s. The participation rate plunged to 62.4 percent in September.

Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":

Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.

But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002.


The incredible shrinking labor force

That's nice...now take a risk and come down from your ivory tower and talk to those mere serfs you are so afraid of and find out the real story. I promise they won't hurt you....as long as you don't say something stupid and piss them off.

What's your point? Those "job creators" having the lowest sustained tax "burden" since before Harding/Coolidge's great depression, aren't giving US a good return on investment???

I'm lost....

You keep attacking the rich and republicans on grounds that if Republicans hold office there are no jobs being crated and if there are rich people less jobs are created.

Where I get lost is you post fake images of massive job losses under Bush and incredible job growth under Obama... Despite the rich being far richer and there being a Republican Senate/House. Yes under Bush it was a Democrat Senate and House and under Clinton it was a Republican Senate and house...

You then called the 1930's depression Harding/Coolidge's despite Hoover and FDR being in power. Also Wilson left Harding with a depression before Harding was elected and it took 18 months to get out of a depression and into a booming economy.

My point is you flip back and forth very quickly on what branches of Government are responsible for a recession, depression or low jobs... You always seem to find a way to blame Republicans and not Democrats, every single time.

I'm not a Republican nor do I defend them, simply pointing out that yer a race baiting, clueless, economically ignorant partisan hack.

Even RW (one of the internet dumbest fucking people) blamed having a Republican house/Senate as the problem... Yet I doubt he blames the House/Senate being Democrat for the 2008 crash.

YES, MORE DISHONESTY FROM THE "MODERATE". SHOCKING



PLEASE GIVE ME ONE POLICY THE DEM CONGRESS DID JAN 2007-JAN 2009 THAT CAUSED DUBYA'S GREAT RECESSION?

NOW GIVE ME A BILL THE GOP GAVE US THAT HELPED OBAMA WITH CREATING JOBS? oops


IF you were HONEST, you'd see that the GOP "job creator" BULLSHIT that taxes HAVE to be GUTTED to create the environment for jobs to be created is a total fukkn lie!

I'M CONSISTENT HOWEVER, PREZ POLICY IS NUMBER 1 ON THE ECONOMY, REGARDLESS OF PARTY IN THE CONGRESS!


Oh right, Harding/Coolidge didn't cheer on the credit bubbles and 3 asset bubbles that Hoover/FDR inherited right? JUST LIKE DUBYA DIDN'T CHEER ON THE SUBPRIME BANKSTER BUBBLE, RIGHT?

LMAOROG

 

[bedowin62]

The BLS reports that 94% of Not-in-Labor-Force currently wants a job or desires to be in the U.S. workforce anytime soon.

That's not true...in fact the opposite...94% say they do NOT want a job.

is it too much to ask for a little of that touted left-wing intellectual curiosity and critical-thinking to ponder why an increasing number of people "do NOT want a job" if as you are saying this is true??

 

[bedowin62]

Job creation misses big in September

The unemployment rate has been declining steadily, but that has come in significant part due to the lowest labor force participation rate since the late 1970s. The participation rate plunged to 62.4 percent in September.

Retirement Among Baby Boomers Contributing To Shrinking Labor Force. According to The Washington Post, many economists agree the shrinking labor force participation rate is largely explained by a demographic shift, wherein "baby boomers are starting to retire en masse":

Demographics have always played a big role in the rise and fall of the labor force. Between 1960 and 2000, the labor force in the United States surged from 59 percent to a peak of 67.3 percent. That was largely due to the fact that more women were entering the labor force while improvements in health and information technology allowed Americans to work more years.

But since 2000, the labor force rate has been steadily declining as the baby-boom generation has been retiring. Because of this, the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago expects the labor force participation rate to be lower in 2020 than it is today, regardless of how well the economy does.

In a March report titled "Dispelling an Urban Legend," Dean Maki, an economist at Barclays Capital, found that demographics accounted for a majority of the drop in the participation rate since 2002.


The incredible shrinking labor force

That's nice...now take a risk and come down from your ivory tower and talk to those mere serfs you are so afraid of and find out the real story. I promise they won't hurt you....as long as you don't say something stupid and piss them off.

What's your point? Those "job creators" having the lowest sustained tax "burden" since before Harding/Coolidge's great depression, aren't giving US a good return on investment???

I'm lost....

You keep attacking the rich and republicans on grounds that if Republicans hold office there are no jobs being crated and if there are rich people less jobs are created.

Where I get lost is you post fake images of massive job losses under Bush and incredible job growth under Obama... Despite the rich being far richer and there being a Republican Senate/House. Yes under Bush it was a Democrat Senate and House and under Clinton it was a Republican Senate and house...

You then called the 1930's depression Harding/Coolidge's despite Hoover and FDR being in power. Also Wilson left Harding with a depression before Harding was elected and it took 18 months to get out of a depression and into a booming economy.

My point is you flip back and forth very quickly on what branches of Government are responsible for a recession, depression or low jobs... You always seem to find a way to blame Republicans and not Democrats, every single time.

I'm not a Republican nor do I defend them, simply pointing out that yer a race baiting, clueless, economically ignorant partisan hack.

Even RW (one of the internet dumbest fucking people) blamed having a Republican house/Senate as the problem... Yet I doubt he blames the House/Senate being Democrat for the 2008 crash.

YES, MORE DISHONESTY FROM THE "MODERATE". SHOCKING



PLEASE GIVE ME ONE POLICY THE DEM CONGRESS DID JAN 2007-JAN 2009 THAT CAUSED DUBYA'S GREAT RECESSION?

NOW GIVE ME A BILL THE GOP GAVE US THAT HELPED OBAMA WITH CREATING JOBS? oops


IF you were HONEST, you'd see that the GOP "job creator" BULLSHIT that taxes HAVE to be GUTTED to create the environment for jobs to be created is a total fukkn lie!

I'M CONSISTENT HOWEVER, PREZ POLICY IS NUMBER 1 ON THE ECONOMY, REGARDLESS OF PARTY IN THE CONGRESS!


Oh right, Harding/Coolidge didn't cheer on the credit bubbles and 3 asset bubbles that Hoover/FDR inherited right? JUST LIKE DUBYA DIDN'T CHEER ON THE SUBPRIME BANKSTER BUBBLE, RIGHT?

LMAOROG

you're coming unhinged!!

snicker

 

[saveliberty]

Explain that to the goobers who are trying to include the unemployable in the numbers.

There is no such thing as unemployable numbers. There are employed, unemployed and those not seeking employment.

 

[bedowin62]

The labor force participation rate is the percentage of working-age persons who are employed or unemployed but looking for a job in the Civilian Labor Force. The U.S. labor force participation rate suffered a serious decline from a high of 67.3% in January 2000 to 62.6% today—a net 7.0% decline from peak and a low that has not occurred since October 1977. Today’s labor force participation rate would be much lower if not for working women who did not participate in the U.S. labor force in 1977 as they do today. The primary reason for the dramatic drop in the labor force participation rate is largely due to those that simply have quit looking for work and are now categorized as Not-in-Labor-Force.
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics



The American workforce is getting grayer. Economic uncertainty is keeping older Americans on the job and delaying retirement. As shown above, the BLS projects that the percentage of older Americans in the U.S. labor force will increase 40% from 1990 to 2020 while the percentage of younger Americans, aged 16 to 24, will shrink by 25%. Data also shows that once older workers are out of work, they have a much harder time finding employment than a younger worker.
- See more at: Bureau of Labor Statistics | Jobenomics

 

[saveliberty]

^^^^

Gee, pretty much what I said.

 

[bedowin62]

The Left insists the whole LFPR is lower because of retiring Baby Boomers.

In fact people of retirement-age are CHOOSING TO REMAIN IN THE LABOR MARKET MORE THAN EVER, that rate actually ROSE